Rate the 2013 Vuelta route

[Forunculo]

Cool cool cool! The more MTF's the better because part of them anyways are doomed to end up with nothing.

I think it's a good route for Andy

 

[Netserk]

Cool cool cool! The more MTF's the better because part of them anyways are doomed to end up with nothing.

only if there are 11 of them

 

[icefire]

I think it's a good route for Andy

Any route in Spain is good for Andy, if only because of the bars

 

[Hugo Koblet]

Pros:

Looks very, very entertaining
Not many sprinter stages

Cons:

TTT
Only 1 ITT
Too unbalanced because of time bonuses

Overall an 8. Drop the TTT and the bonifications and include a prologe and another ITT instead of one of the ___________/ stages and it looks really good.

Much, much better than the Tour route.

 

[Descender]

Cool cool cool! The more MTF's the better because part of them anyways are doomed to end up with nothing.

Awesome logic!!

 

[Forunculo]

Pros:

Looks very, very entertaining
Not many sprinter stages

Cons:

TTT
Only 1 ITT
Too unbalanced because of time bonuses

Overall an 8. Drop the TTT and the bonifications and include a prologe and another ITT instead of one of the ___________/ stages and it looks really good.

Much, much better than the Tour route.

To me one of the best features, only lacks a 50 km flat ITT and one descent finish in exchange of one uphill finish

 

[Libertine Seguros]

To me one of the best features, only lacks a 50 km flat ITT and one descent finish in exchange of one uphill finish

Or, they could have a firework display and draw lots at random to see which GC contender gets some free time, because that would fulfil the only real defence of the TTT ("it looks cool"). The only valid defence of the TTT is the encouragement of providing a more balanced team, but in a race with so many uphill finishes, I think that's going to be rendered more or less irrelevant because none of the teams will bother providing a balanced team in that respect.

 

[apmfbs]

5,5 / 6

Only one and short time trial and a bad third week. I like a lot the route till the second rest day, but then I think that Peña Cabarga is very dissapointing and Naranco is a bit useless.

The Pyrenees are finally good, and I like a lot Purche-Haza Llana and Fisterra stages

 

[Parrulo]

gave it a 5.

-3 for overkill of uphill finishes
-2 for lack of a proper time trial
-2 for lack of a descent finish
+2 for a couple of well designed mountain stages.

 

[roundabout]

Still too many uphill finishes.

Mountains are ok though by Vuelta standards. Would have preferred Rabassa in the Andorra stage.

something like this

http://tracks4bikers.com/tracks/show/123899

Edit: also just 1 stage over 200km

 

[airstream]

only if there are 11 of them

No. I don't think it depends on quantity. 3-4 MTFs can end with almost nothing. And very mountanious 2012 Giro didn't give a big spectacle too.

 

[cineteq]

I bet riders like Gesink and Nibali will do Vuelta hard to prepare the worlds

So Gesink is the only one doing the 3 GTs?

 

[Descender]

Or, they could have a firework display and draw lots at random to see which GC contender gets some free time, because that would fulfil the only real defence of the TTT ("it looks cool"). The only valid defence of the TTT is the encouragement of providing a more balanced team, but in a race with so many uphill finishes, I think that's going to be rendered more or less irrelevant because none of the teams will bother providing a balanced team in that respect.

Hats off.

_____________

 

[the asian]

I gave it a six.

Pros- Better than expected
- Four proper Mountain stage including one stage which can turn out to be epic
- two new summit finishes.
- Very few pancake flat stages (only two )


Cons-Too many purito finishes, even though it was to be expected.
- Repetition of Gallina climb from last year.
- Angliru is too soon. ( Should be at least a 3yr gap)
- TTT is too long for my liking( around 20Km is optimum)
- A longer and flatter ITT (around 45Km) would have provided more balance.

 

[the asian]

So Gesink is the only one doing the 3 GTs?

Pretty sure Gesnik wont. Nibali will do the Vuelta.

 

[airstream]

Awesome logic!!

Well we disscussed about a concept of 'balanced route' and necessity of descent finishes a lot...

My primarily goal is a qualitative contention so I don't want to see much TTing at Giro and Vuelta in order to see Purito will fight against Alex in TT among a mediocre TT field.

 

[airstream]

Awesome logic!!

Well we discussed about a concept of 'balanced route' and necessity of descent finishes a lot...

 

[will10]

I gave it an 8, it's a decent route but once again a little too unbalanced. It's perfectly plausible for this race to be over long before Angliru which will give it a Giro '06/Giro '11 feel. It's missing a TT for the specialists that you don't need the small chainring for, and I preferred it when the TTT was short enough to not affect the race and was little more than an extension of the team presentation.

 

[Forunculo]

Or, they could have a firework display and draw lots at random to see which GC contender gets some free time, because that would fulfil the only real defence of the TTT ("it looks cool"). The only valid defence of the TTT is the encouragement of providing a more balanced team, but in a race with so many uphill finishes, I think that's going to be rendered more or less irrelevant because none of the teams will bother providing a balanced team in that respect.

If there are important gaps (1:00-2:00 min) can trigger many moves from day one. I would prefer one long prologue (10 km) and a TTT at the 4th/5th stage but given Unipublic standars a 30 Km TTT it's not just a "cool" presentation but an important stage for the GC. And there are 3 or 4 stages where a team can play tactics like Saxo at Fuente De. So the balance issue is there. The problem is none of the last 3 stages avoid the single climb dogma. And I miss a second flat ITT

So Gesink is the only one doing the 3 GTs?

I don't know, I was talking about those who rides Giro ans skip the TdF like Nibali

 

[The Hitch]

4/10

Pros
Not many pan flat stages
Uphill finishes aren't great but far better than sprints and at least get to see gc action every day
2 ok mountain stages.

Cons
Ridiculous ttt
Going into France
No descent finishes
Ttt
Going into France - as if Spain doesnt have climbs
Ttt

 

[roundabout]

Going to France is a con, but going to Andorra isn't.

I would say that going to France and climbing the combination of climbs that were climbed by the Tour last year is more of a con.

 

[Ferminal]

The whole route is a con

 

[Libertine Seguros]

If there are important gaps (1:00-2:00 min) can trigger many moves from day one. I would prefer one long prologue (10 km) and a TTT at the 4th/5th stage but given Unipublic standars a 30 Km TTT it's not just a "cool" presentation but an important stage for the GC. And there are 3 or 4 stages where a team can play tactics like Saxo at Fuente De. So the balance issue is there. The problem is none of the last 3 stages avoid the single climb dogma. And I miss a second flat ITT



I don't know, I was talking about those who rides Giro ans skip the TdF like Nibali

Personally I would prefer a prologue, or a mid-length ITT somewhere in the first week (like the 2008 Tour), and a TTT roughly when hell freezes over. Maybe it can be included once every 5 years or something so it's fresh and retains some spectacle, but just like the MTFs, it's become formulaic now. There is one in at least 2 of the 3 GTs every year. It's now mundane, and prejudices the competition by favouring those who are in the teams most likely to be the strongest anyway. It doesn't feel like the change of pace to make teams consider their choices that it should be; it feels like part of the furniture. Like an old sofa that has outlived its usefulness but you can't seem to get rid of.

 

[The Hitch]

Another pro is that this is actually the Vuelta a Espana this time round and not the Vuelta al norte de Espana,

Going to France is a con, but going to Andorra isn't.

I would say that going to France and climbing the combination of climbs that were climbed by the Tour last year is more of a con.

going to France is a con because they are using climbs of another grand tour.

I dont mind if the Giro goes into Austria or the Tour into Switzerland or the Vuelta into Portugal to use climbs.

But the Giro and Vuelta going into France to tackle the same bloody climbs we see once every 2 years in the Tour is a con. Especially since those climbs add nothing to the race that cant be found in the host country itself.

Its not like the Vuelta couldnt create those stages without crossing the border. The whole ****ing country is a mountain range.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Some of my points seem contradictory.

Positives
- Has some tough climbing stages.
- Lots of days for GC racing.

Negatives
- TTT is too long
- Andorra again.
- Not enough time trialling km's and the tt in the race favours the climbers, which is redundant considering the amount of climbs.
- Use the same climbs too frequently.
- A couple more sprinter stages would have been more fair.
- The tough climbs are too back ended in relation to the entire race.
- Too many hilltop finishes.

Are the profiles on the vuelta website wrong because for some stages, the profile does not match the stage route. For example, the stage to Pena Carbarga is a flat stage with no climb.

I give it a 5.